My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2004_1018
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
CC_Minutes_2004_1018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:32:06 AM
Creation date
2/15/2006 1:07:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/18/2004
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />City Council Study Session - 10/18/04 <br />Minutes - Page 10 <br /> <br />wasn't confident a break-even scenario was possible. <br /> <br />Further discussion included grant applications; special <br />programming; and limited sources for users in comparison to <br />covering the cost of a full-time staff person. <br /> <br />Staff Directive <br />Council consensus was "no." <br /> <br />5. Should Council eliminate the Custodian position? <br />Discussion <br />City Manager Beets noted that the Nature Center employed a <br />full-time custodian, the only full time custodial position in the <br />city employee structure. Mr. Beets recommended that <br />consideration be given to redesigning custodial maintenance for <br />all city facilities, including the expanded City Hall, perhaps <br />through contract maintenance for an overall cost savings, based <br />on square footage. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka spoke In support of the contract <br />approach. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder suggested reduction by retirement or <br />attrition, rather than actual layoffs. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing, with regret, spoke in support of eliminating the <br />custodial position and consideration for contractual maintenance <br />for all facilities. <br /> <br />Staff Directive <br />Council consensus was "yes." <br /> <br />6. Should Council eliminate a Maintenance position or <br />positions? If 'yes," should this be a Parks & <br />Recreation Maintenance worker, a Streets maintenance <br />Worker, both, or some combination of the two (such as <br />0.5 FTEfrom each department's budget)? <br />City Manager Beets recommended a reduction in the <br />maintenance function by reducing two full-time positions; one in <br />the Streets and one in the Parks and Recreation Department. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.